A total of 16 volumes of evidence and 10 research papers were
published between 1969 and 1973. The final report was delivered to
Ted
Heath's Conservative government, which
had come to power at the general election in
June 1970. The report rejected the options of independence or federalism, in favour of
devolved, directly-elected Scottish and Welshassemblies. Two members of the
Commission, Lord
Crowther-Hunt and Professor Alan Peacock, did not sign the
report, disagreeing with the interpretation of the terms of
reference and the conclusions. Their views were published in a
separate Memorandum of Dissent.[2]

Terms of
reference

The Commission's terms of reference were:

To examine the present functions of the present legislature
and government in relation to the several countries, nations and
regions of the United Kingdom;

To consider, having regard to changes in local government
organisation and in the administrative and other relationships
between the various parts of the United Kingdom, and to the
interests of the prosperity and good government and our people
under the Crown, whether any changes are desirable in those
functions or otherwise in present constitutional and economic
relationships;

To consider also whether any changes are desirable in the
constitutional and economic relationships between the Channel
Islands and the Isle of Man.[3]

Proposals

The commission was unable to reach unanimous agreement, with the
final report including a number of options supported by different
members. Two commissioners did not sign the report, producing
instead a memorandum of dissent.

Advertisements

Scotland

Eight members favoured a devolved legislature for Scotland.
Executive power would be exercised by ministers appointed by the
Crown from members of a directly elected assembly. Areas of
responsibility to be transferred to the devolved body would be some
of those already under the supervision of the Secretary of State for
Scotland and the Lord Advocate. These included:

Education

The environment

Health

Home affairs

Legal matters

Social services

Responsibility for agriculture, fisheries and food would be
divided between the Assembly and the United Kingdom government,
while the latter would retain control of electricity supply.

With the establishment of the devolved government, it was
proposed that the number of MPs elected to
Westminster from Scottish constituencies would be reduced from 71
to about 51.

The assembly was to be a single chamber body of about 100
members, elected under the single transferable vote
system of proportional
representation, with multi-member constituencies. The
Commission did not propose to give the assembly a name, feeling
this was a matter for the Scottish people, although the term
"convention" had been suggested. The determination of the number of
seats and boundaries was to be reserved to the United Kingdom
parliament.

The new constitutional arrangements would not require the
appointment of a governor, while the title "Scottish Premier" was
suggested for the head of the executive.

The office of Secretary of State for Scotland would be
abolished, although a cabinet minister would continue to have
special responsibility in representing Scotland as well as having
other duties.[5]

Wales

Six commissioners favoured legislative devolution for Wales.
This would be similar to the scheme envisaged for Scotland, but
with less responsibility in legal affairs, reflecting that Scotland
had a discrete legal system separate from England and Wales.

As in Scotland, a 100 member unicameral assembly was proposed,
elected by proportional representation. A title suggested to the
commission for the body was "Senate". Similarly, the head of the
executive might be titled "Welsh Premier", and the office of Secretary of State for
Wales would be abolished. The number of Westminster MPs elected
by Welsh constituencies would be reduced from 36 to about 31.[5]

England

The signatories to the main report were unanimous in their
opposition of legislative devolution to England as a whole, or to
any English region. There were however proposals for some powers
being devolved to regional level:

Eight members supported the idea of non-executive co-ordinating
and advisory councils to make representations and give advice to
central government on government policy effecting the regions. Each
council was to have about 60 members, the majority elected by local
authorities in the region with about 20% nominated by the minister
responsible for regional affairs to represent industry,
agriculture, commerce, trade unions, and statutory promotional
bodies in the region.

Two members favoured the establishment of regional assemblies
with executive powers, elected in a similar manner to those in
Scotland and Wales.

In each case the regions to be used were to be those already
established for economic planning, with boundaries adjusted to
reflect the changes made by the Local Government Act 1972,
although names were not suggested:

Cornwall

The Commission recognised that "a very small minority"
in Cornwall existed that claimed a separate national identity for
the Cornish people, and who wished to have separate arrangements
for their government. They however felt that "despite its
individual character and strong sense of regional identity, there
is no evidence that its people have a wish to see it separated for
the purposes of government from the rest of England". However
they recognised that"the people of Cornwall regard their part
of the United Kingdom as not just another English county" and
accordingly they recommended that the designation "Duchy of
Cornwall" be used on all appropriate occasions to emphasise the
"special relationship and the territorial integrity of
Cornwall".[5][6]

Northern
Ireland

The Commission did not make any recommendations on devolution in
Northern
Ireland, for which the Northern Ireland
Constitution Act 1973 had made provision. However, the report
did recommend that the number of Westminster MPs from the province
be increased in line with the rest of the UK, from 12 to about
17.

Channel Islands and the
Isle of Man

The Commission did not propose to make any changes in the
relationship between the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands
and the Isle of Man.
They rejected a suggestion that responsibilities for external
affairs be divided between the UK and island governments, but
supported a Home
Office proposal that a more formal process of consultation be
carried out in future over the application of international
agreements in the islands.

Memorandum
of dissent

Lord Crowther-Hunt and Professor Peacock did not sign the
report, producing a separate series of proposals in a minority
memorandum. The main differences between the document and the main
report were:

Regional
assemblies

There would be seven elected regional assemblies, one for
Scotland, one for Wales and five regional assemblies in England.
They would have considerably greater powers than proposed in the
majority report, taking over much of the machinery of central
government within their area, and each having their own civil
service. They would also replace ad hoc authorities such as regional health
authorities and water authorities, which were due to be introduced
in reorganisation of the National Health Service and
water industry. They would also have supervisory powers over gas
and electricity boards. They would also be able to make policy
through strategic plans for the physical, social and economic
development of their regions.

A Minister for the Regions would hold a cabinet seat.

Commons
reform

The memorandum also suggested changes in the function of the United
Kingdom House of Commons. Members of parliament were to form
"functional committees" corresponding to central government
departments. Each committee was to have a supporting staff and
would consider the implications of both United Kingdom and European
legislation, as well as having policy-making powers. To reflect
their greater responsibilities, MPs would be paid full-time
professional salaries.

Political
reaction

There was mixed reaction to the Commission's report:

The chairman of Plaid Cymru regarded it as a "real
breakthrough", and called for the government to provide a
commitment to introduce a Welsh government with legislative power.
However, they called for the assembly to have additional powers
over economic and industrial planning.

Winifred Ewing, vice-chairman of the Scottish National Party,
described it as a "step in the right direction", and that the
proposed Scottish assembly "would lead to the self-government the
SNP sought".

The secretary of the Welsh Labour Party welcomed the
introduction of an assembly, but opposed the reduction in the
number of Westminster MPs.

The leader of the Welsh Liberal Party believed it to be a
"major breakthrough" which would lead to proportional
representation being introduced in Westminster.

An official of the Welsh Conservative Party called for people
not to be "over-influenced by the vocal minority, which includes
extremists and nationalist fanatics."

The chairman of the Scottish Conservative Party expressed
doubts about the reduction in the number of MPs.

The secretary of Mebyon Kernow, while noting that their
proposal for a Cornish Regional Council had been rejected, said
they were encouraged by the establishment of assemblies in Scotland
and Wales, and the emphasis on the "Duchy of Cornwall".[7]

Consequences

Following a change of government at the February 1974 election, the new Labour
administration published a white paperDemocracy and Devolution:
proposals for Scotland and Wales based on the final report in
September 1974. The white paper led directly to the unsuccessful
Scotland and Wales Bill, which was withdrawn in February 1977. Two
separate pieces of legislation were passed in the following year:
the Scotland
Act 1978 and the Wales Act 1978. The provisions of the
Acts would not come into force unless approved by referendums, and
accordingly Scottish and Welsh devolution referendums were held on 1
March 1979. The Welsh assembly was rejected by a majority of
voters, while Scottish devolution was supported by 51.6% of those
voting, or 32.9% of those on the electoral register. An amendment
to the Scotland Act, introduced by government backbencher George
Cunningham, had specified that it must have the support of 40%
of the entire electorate, and the referendum was lost.[8] The
results of the referendums led to the repeal of the respective Acts in March 1979. A
vote of no confidence was subsequently lost by the government on 28
March when the Scottish National Party voted with the
Conservatives, Liberals and Ulster Unionist Party, leading to the
general
election of 1979 and the beginning of 18 years of Conservative
rule.